{"id":11142,"date":"2020-12-21T10:36:36","date_gmt":"2020-12-21T15:36:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/blog\/?p=11142"},"modified":"2025-05-15T15:25:08","modified_gmt":"2025-05-15T19:25:08","slug":"copay-survey","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/blog\/2020\/12\/21\/copay-survey\/","title":{"rendered":"Prisons shouldn&#8217;t be charging medical co-pays &#8211; especially during a pandemic"},"content":{"rendered":"<p class=\"updated\">This briefing has been updated with <a href=\"\/blog\/2025\/05\/15\/copay_waivers\/\">updated data in May 2025.<\/a><\/p>\n<p>\nDespite a record number of new COVID-19 cases in prisons <a href=\"https:\/\/www.themarshallproject.org\/2020\/05\/01\/a-state-by-state-look-at-coronavirus-in-prisons\">this month<\/a>, some state departments of correction are already starting to roll back necessary suspensions of medical co-pays. Prior to the pandemic, most prison systems charged incarcerated people between $2 and $5 for each medical appointment &#8212; a fee that can make attaining medical care burdensome or impossible. In March, we found that many states had <a href=\"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/virus\/virusresponse.html\">relaxed these policies<\/a> in response to the pandemic, either suspending all medical co-pays, or suspending those for respiratory or flu-like symptoms. But in a follow-up survey of medical co-pay policies, we found that since March, three states have made their policies <i>more<\/i> restrictive in the middle of the pandemic.<\/p>\n<p>Arkansas, Idaho, and Minnesota had previously suspended all co-pays as of March, but have since reinstated co-pays for non-flu-like symptoms. They are now among 29 states that currently suspend co-pays <i>only <\/i>for visits involving respiratory, flu-related, or COVID-19 symptoms &#8212; a policy that discourages many from seeking treatment. Even worse, Nevada has continued to charge co-pays throughout the pandemic, regardless of symptoms. <\/p>\n<p>Meanwhile, three states have improved their policies since March: New Jersey has suspended all medical co-pays, and Delaware and Hawaii suspended co-pays for those with flu-like symptoms. <\/p>\n<style>\n#copaytable td:first-child{padding-right:15px; text-align:left}\n#copaytable th{text-align:left}<\/style>\n<h3 class=\"tableheader center\" style=\"margin-bottom:25px;\">Most states are still charging medical co&#8209;pays in prisons<br \/>despite the ongoing pandemic<\/h3>\n<table id=\"copaytable\" class=\"dense\">\n<caption>Table created December 14, 2020. We welcome updates from states that have revised their policies. States can <a href=\"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/contact.html\">contact us<\/a> to let us know.<br \/>\n*Five states &#8212; Arizona, Kentucky, Louisiana, Nevada, and South Carolina &#8212; did not respond to our survey or to repeated follow-up inquiries requesting updated medical co-pay information.<\/caption>\n<tr>\n<th class=\"left\">States&nbsp;that&nbsp;do&nbsp;not charge co&#8209;pays<\/th>\n<th class=\"left\">States that have suspended all co&#8209;pays for incarcerated people in response to the COVID&#8209;19 pandemic<\/th>\n<th class=\"left\">States that have suspended co&#8209;pays for respiratory, flu-related, or COVID&#8209;19 symptoms<\/th>\n<th class=\"left\">States that have not made any changes in co&#8209;pay policy regarding COVID&#8209;19 pandemic<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>California<\/td>\n<td>Alabama<\/td>\n<td>Alaska<\/td>\n<td>Nevada*<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>District&nbsp;of&nbsp;Columbia<\/td>\n<td>Connecticut<\/td>\n<td>Arizona*<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Illinois<\/td>\n<td>Louisiana*<\/td>\n<td>Arkansas<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Missouri<\/td>\n<td>Maryland<\/td>\n<td>Colorado<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Montana<\/td>\n<td>Massachusetts<\/td>\n<td>Delaware<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Nebraska<\/td>\n<td>New Jersey<\/td>\n<td>Florida<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>New Mexico<\/td>\n<td>Rhode Island<\/td>\n<td>Georgia<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>New York<\/td>\n<td>Tennessee<\/td>\n<td>Hawaii<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Oregon<\/td>\n<td>West Virginia<\/td>\n<td>Idaho<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Vermont<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>Indiana<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Virginia<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>Iowa<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Wyoming<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>Kansas<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>Kentucky*<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>Maine<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>Michigan<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>Minnesota<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>Mississippi<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>New Hampshire<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>North Carolina<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>North Dakota<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>Ohio<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>Oklahoma<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>Pennsylvania<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>South Carolina*<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>South Dakota<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>Texas<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>Utah<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>Washington<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>Wisconsin<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<p>Before the pandemic prompted these suspensions, all but 11 states charged medical co-pays. While a $2 to $5 co-pay may not seem like much to a &#8220;free world&#8221; worker, unconscionably low wages in prisons make even the lower medical co-pays entirely too expensive. Because incarcerated people typically earn 14 to 63 cents per hour, these charges are the equivalent of <a href=\"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/blog\/2017\/04\/19\/copays\/\">charging a free-world worker $200 or $500<\/a> for a medical visit. <\/p>\n<p>Currently, most states are suspending co-pays for flu-like or respiratory symptoms. But this is not enough to ensure that people are comfortable seeking treatment, and thereby preventing the spread of the virus. As we&#8217;ve seen over the course of the pandemic, not all COVID-19 symptoms fall within these vague categories &#8211; and many people don&#8217;t display symptoms at all. And some states, such as <a href=\"https:\/\/www.in.gov\/idoc\/files\/IDOC-COVID19-Preparedness-Plan-11-1-2020.pdf\">Indiana<\/a>, have implemented policies that charge co-pays to those who &#8220;disingenuously&#8221; report symptoms. Policies like these could lead people to hold off on seeking care until their symptoms become more severe. What&#8217;s more, it&#8217;s likely harder than ever for many incarcerated people to afford medical copays, due to possible loss of paid work for themselves and their loved ones. <\/p>\n<p>Prisons should instead enact policies that mirror the outside world, where people are encouraged to get tested often and carefully monitor their symptoms to prevent outbreaks. Suspending medical co-pays for everyone for the duration of the pandemic &#8211; or better yet, beyond the pandemic, as 11 states and D.C. have already done &#8211; is a necessary step departments of corrections should take to attempt to stop the spread of COVID-19 in prisons.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Our December survey of medical co-pay policies shows that some states are reinstating medical co-pays as COVID-19 continues to spread in prisons.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":44,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[52,1],"tags":[55],"coauthors":[74],"class_list":["post-11142","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-briefings","category-uncategorized","tag-health"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11142","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/44"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=11142"}],"version-history":[{"count":10,"href":"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11142\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":17463,"href":"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11142\/revisions\/17463"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=11142"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=11142"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=11142"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=11142"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}